Douglas K. Mutua v Milly Glass Works Ltd [2019] KEELRC 848 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled Milly Glass Works unfairly sacked its IT officer for a subscription lapse management ignored, awarding him Kshs. 294,653.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination was substantively fair
Termination was substantively unfair; the Claimant had no access rights to the Cyberoam and did all he could to secure renewal
The court found the Claimant had no access rights to the Cyberoam device, which the Respondent did not contradict. His email requesting access was refused on security grounds. When the external provider alerted him to the expired subscription, he relayed the matter to his bosses who ignored it. The final decision on renewal lay with management, so the Claimant could not be blamed for the lapse.
Whether the termination was procedurally fair
Termination was procedurally unfair because the Respondent failed to consider the Claimant's representations and never concluded the disciplinary process
The Respondent did not consider the Claimant's representations in his show-cause response and at the disciplinary hearing. Although the hearing of 15 February 2017 was adjourned to later dates, no further proceedings took place; the meeting of 2 March 2017 merely communicated the termination decision. Relying on Moses O. Ogila, the court held an incomplete disciplinary process violates Section 41 of the Employment Act.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to the remedies sought
Compensation reduced to six months' salary; notice pay and leave pay admitted and payable
The court awarded six months' salary as compensation considering the Claimant's length of service, employment record and the Respondent's conduct. The claims for one month's salary in lieu of notice and leave pay for 15.5 days were admitted by the Respondent and, absent evidence of prior payment, were due and payable.
Legal principles established
#- An employee who lacks access rights and has escalated a renewal issue to his superiors cannot be faulted for non-renewal of a subscription
- Poor performance must first be pointed out to an employee with reasonable time given to improve before termination
- An incomplete disciplinary process offends the procedural fairness requirements of Section 41 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.6 months' salary in compensation of Kshs. 235,200
- 2.1 month's salary in lieu of notice of Kshs. 39,200
- 3.Leave pay for 15.5 days of Kshs. 20,253
- 4.Total award of Kshs. 294,653 with interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
- 5.Claimant to have the costs of the case
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act 2007 over an employment dispute
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Douglas K. Mutua v Milly Glass Works Ltd [2019] KEELRC 848 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Statement of Claim dated 2nd May 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/848/eng@2019-09-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.